oushi wrote:You seem to not see the difference between view of emptiness and "not knowing". I never said that water, thirst, or "I" does not exist, did I? What would be the point of jumping from one extreme to another? So, you accusation missed completely. People think that they can know things by naming them, and are looking for this knowledge in written or spoken words. By honestly admitting that you don't know anything, you do not fall into a trap, but you liberate yourself from desire to know something that is unknowable, desire that makes karma. Do you know who you are? Because I have no idea who I am. I have some "stickers" like name, look, history, but those are only empty labels. As I said before, there is nothing to know, and no one that knows.

You almost climbed out of the pit, but then you slipped back in again at the last second:

Nobody, nothing,Somebody, something.Therein Mara lurks in wait,to cast us back in the cycle of birth, death and suffering.

(77) Someone gives us advice from the depths of his heart, Which is for our own good, but is harsh to our ears, And with anger we view him as if he’s our foe. Yet when someone without any true feelings for us Deceitfully tells us what we like to hear, With no taste or discernment we’re kind in return. Trample him, trample him, dance on the head Of this treacherous concept of selfish concern. Tear out the heart of this self-centered butcher Who slaughters our chance to gain final release.

You seem to be more lost the I thought. If you like Nagarjuna, find his final conclusion. The only place you can get stuck is in the middle of his teachings, and that's the place you are lost. Ask yourself a question, what do you know for sure, and if you are lucky enough, you will realize that there is no such a thing. Don't try to be my savior, simply be honest. What is there I need to know? I ask because you behave like you knew.

gregkavarnos wrote:I give you his starting premise instead of his final conclusion.

I. Those whose intellects have gone well beyond existence and nonexistenceand do not dwell (anywhere), perfectly meditate upon themeaning of the conditioned which is profound and without a support.

Nagarjuna Seventy Stanzas on Emptiness

When you say "I don't know", are you affirming existence or nonexistence? Or rather, you are well beyond those extremes?When you say "I don't know", where do you dwell?When you say "I don't know", what is your support? When you say "I don't know", where is your intellect?

To know is to believe something is true, have intellectual support for it, and dwell in this view.

"If you understand anything, you don't understand. Only when you understand nothing is it true understanding. The sutra say "Not to let go of wisdom is stupidity""- Bodhidharma"

oushi wrote:When you say "I don't know", are you affirming existence or nonexistence? Or rather, you are well beyond those extremes?

Affirming non-existence of knowledge.

When you say "I don't know", where do you dwell?

In ignorance.

When you say "I don't know", what is your support?

Samsaric existence.

When you say "I don't know", where is your intellect?

Your intellect is supporting the view that it does not know.

To know is to believe something is true, have intellectual support for it, and dwell in this view.

I can know that something is not true.

"If you understand anything, you don't understand. Only when you understand nothing is it true understanding. The sutra say "Not to let go of wisdom is stupidity""- Bodhidharma"

The ignorant also do not understand, does that make them wise or stupid? You have to understand (that nasty word again) that Bodhidharmas advice is a) to not fall into the trap of considering Buddhism an intellectual pursuit and b) that enlightenment has nothing to do with a "you", thus if "you" think that "you" are enlightened (ie have true understanding) then "you" have not truly understood anything.PS Again, like I said at the beginning of our conversation, you are falling into nihilistic view due to a misunderstanding of the nature of the two truths. This is a common mistake, we all make it at some point in time (and some of us continue to make it ). I am not launching a personal attack on you, nor am I judging you. If you do not want to heed some friendly advice then...

There is knowing by studying, investigating and then, this teaching I love so much from the Vietnamese teacher Thich Nhat Hanh: “For things to reveal themselves to us, we need to be ready to abandon our views about them.

Guarding knowledge is not good way to understand. Understanding means to throw away your knowledge. You have to be able to transcend your knowledge the way people climb a ladder. If you are on the fifht step of a ladder and think that you are very high, there is no hope for you to climb to the sixth.

The technique is to release. The Buddhist way of understanding is always letting go of our views and knowledge in order to transcend. This is the most important teaching. That is why I use the image of water to talk about understanding. Knowledge is solid; it blocks the way of understanding.

Knowing is not seeking, seeking is not knowing. When you know you stop seeking, when you stop seeking you know. But what if you seek something that cannot be found? Reach for something that cannot be grasped? Samsara.

An old master said: “Yajnadatta thought he had lost his head. When he ceased from his frantic looking for it, he had nothing further to seek.”

For somebody who claims that not knowing is the path to enlightenment you certainly have quite a good knowledge of Zen theory and are more than willing to whip it out when it comes to proving that you know!

And why is that? I don't know. Not knowing doesn't stop water from flowing down the hill. Not knowing the role of oxygen doesn't prevent an infant from breathing. Not knowing doesn't stop me from typing. Should I be ashamed? Is this the reason why people are afraid of it so much? Not a surprise, as we were raised in the environment that punishes not knowing.

oushi wrote:And why is that? I don't know. Not knowing doesn't stop water from flowing down the hill. Not knowing the role of oxygen doesn't prevent an infant from breathing. Not knowing doesn't stop me from typing. Should I be ashamed? Is this the reason why people are afraid of it so much? Not a surprise, as we were raised in the environment that punishes not knowing.